지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
This paper is an extension of the researches on the cases of labor relations commissions correcting discriminations, published in vol. 27(2008), vol. 32(2009), vol. 34(2010) of Journal of Labour Law. They are selections of the cases of the CLRC from September 1, 2010 to June 30, 2011.
First of all, concerning the problems of competency as parties of application for redress of discriminatory treatment, this study raises questions about ① the competency as applicants for redress of discriminatory treatment of subcontractor"s workers who are refused of the competency as parties of application for redress of discriminatory treatment, and ② the validity of application which has been filed more than three months after when the discriminatory treatment occurred due to the application for the redress of unfair dismissal.
Second, concerning the problems of selecting workers to be compared with, this study examines ① the standard limit of the same or similar jobs through cases that provides the proportion of the difference between fixed-term or part-time workers and non fixed-term or full-time workers, and ② if there are multiple workers to be compared with fixed-term or part-time workers, who the selected workers to be compared with will be.
Thirdly, this study pursues the meaning of “wages and other working conditions etc.” concerning the problems of eligibility of the subject of the filed subject.
Lastly, concerning the problems of determination of reasonable discrimination, this study examines whether the differences in working condition by collective agreement are reasonable grounds for discrimination.
First of all, concerning the problems of competency as parties of application for redress of discriminatory treatment, this study raises questions about ① the competency as applicants for redress of discriminatory treatment of subcontractor"s workers who are refused of the competency as parties of application for redress of discriminatory treatment, and ② the validity of application which has been filed more than three months after when the discriminatory treatment occurred due to the application for the redress of unfair dismissal.
Second, concerning the problems of selecting workers to be compared with, this study examines ① the standard limit of the same or similar jobs through cases that provides the proportion of the difference between fixed-term or part-time workers and non fixed-term or full-time workers, and ② if there are multiple workers to be compared with fixed-term or part-time workers, who the selected workers to be compared with will be.
Thirdly, this study pursues the meaning of “wages and other working conditions etc.” concerning the problems of eligibility of the subject of the filed subject.
Lastly, concerning the problems of determination of reasonable discrimination, this study examines whether the differences in working condition by collective agreement are reasonable grounds for discrimination.
#기간제 및 단시간 근로자 보호 등에 관한 법률
#비정규직
#차별시정제도
#노동위원회 차별시정판정례
#차별시정신청인 적격,비교대상근로자
#차별시정의 대상
#차별의 합리적 이유
#Act on the Protection
#etc. of Fixed-term and Part-time employees
#irregular workers
#the redress of discriminatory treatment
#the Labor RelationsCommission
#the competency as parties of application for redress of discriminatory treatment
#the selecting workers to be compared with
#the eligibility of the subject of the filed subject
#the causes of reasonable discrimination.
목차
Ⅰ. 서론
Ⅱ. 차별시정신청인 적격
Ⅲ. 비교대상근로자
Ⅳ. 차별시정의 대상
Ⅴ. 합리적 이유 유무의 판단
Ⅵ. 결론
별첨
참고문헌
Abstract
참고문헌 (9)
참고문헌 신청
1. [학술지(정기간행물)] - 박은정 / 2008 / 비정규직차별시정제도 시행 이후 노동위원회 차별시정판정례 검토 ― 중노위 및 부산ㆍ경남지노위를 중심으로 ― / 노동법학 (27) : 171 ~ 198
2. [학술지(정기간행물)] - 박은정 / 2009 / 비정규직차별시정제도 시행 이후 노동위원회 차별시정판정례 검토Ⅱ ― 중노위를 중심으로(2008.7.1~2009.8.30) ― / 노동법학 (32) : 431 ~ 472
3. [학술지(정기간행물)] - 박은정 / 2010 / 비정규직 차별시정례(중노위․법원)에 대한 검토(Ⅲ) / 노동법학 (35) : 231 ~ 266
5. [학술지(정기간행물)] - 박제성 / 2007 / 비정규직 차별금지제도의 법적 검토 / 노동리뷰 (31)
6. [학술지(정기간행물)] - 박주영 / 2008 / 비정규직 차별사건의 쟁점과 과제 - 노동위원회의 차별판단기준의 문제점을 중심으로 / 민주법학 (37) : 203 ~ 244
2. [학술지(정기간행물)] - 박은정 / 2009 / 비정규직차별시정제도 시행 이후 노동위원회 차별시정판정례 검토Ⅱ ― 중노위를 중심으로(2008.7.1~2009.8.30) ― / 노동법학 (32) : 431 ~ 472
3. [학술지(정기간행물)] - 박은정 / 2010 / 비정규직 차별시정례(중노위․법원)에 대한 검토(Ⅲ) / 노동법학 (35) : 231 ~ 266
5. [학술지(정기간행물)] - 박제성 / 2007 / 비정규직 차별금지제도의 법적 검토 / 노동리뷰 (31)
6. [학술지(정기간행물)] - 박주영 / 2008 / 비정규직 차별사건의 쟁점과 과제 - 노동위원회의 차별판단기준의 문제점을 중심으로 / 민주법학 (37) : 203 ~ 244
이 논문과 연관된 판례 (1)
-
대법원 2010. 7. 22. 선고 2008두4367 판결
[1] 원고용주에게 고용되어 제3자의 사업장에서 제3자의 업무에 종사하는 자를 제3자의 근로자라고 할 수 있으려면, 원고용주는 사업주로서의 독자성이 없거나 독립성을 결하여 제3자의 노무대행기관과 동일시할 수 있는 등 그 존재가 형식적, 명목적인 것에 지나지 아니하고, 사실상 당해 피고용인은 제3자와 종속적인 관계에 있으며, 실질적으로 임금을
자세히 보기
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2013-336-001035834